Brandon Jacobs looks like best prop bet
Posted Feb. 03 at 10:56 AM
I’ve been looking at these Super Bowl prop bets more than I have in the past. I also did a fantasy preview of this game earlier in the week. So I can now combine those two projects, seeing some areas where the line seems to be a little out a whack. “Good line value”, they call it.
In skimming over the lengthy list of Super Bowl props, here’s the 13 that I like the most. I will keep track and see how many I can convert. And after those 13, I'm listing nine more than caught my eye that I don't feel as strongly about. Almost all of these bets are of the 50-50 variety. On the touchdown bets for Ahmad Bradshaw and BenJarvus Green-Ellis, the gambler would get a larger payoff if the player actually scores.
MY FAVORITE SUPER BOWL PROP BETS
Brandon Jacobs, under 1 reception.
The line suggests Jacobs is more likely to catch 2 passes than zero. You get paid $105 for betting $100 that he won’t catch any passes, while you must pay $135 to win $100 that he’ll catch 2. And if he catches 1, it’s a wash and you don’t lose your investment. That’s just wrong; Jacobs has caught only 5 passes in his last 10 games. For the year, he’s caught 17 passes in 17 games, and 9 of those were in a three-game stretch in the middle of the year when Ahmad Bradshaw wasn’t playing. I realize Jacobs has caught 2 passes in two of the three playoff games, but he’s no third-down back. The over-under on this bet shouldn’t be 1 reception, it should be a half reception (and even at half reception, I would beat under before over).
Brandon Jacobs, under 5.5 receiving yards.
Logically, it doesn’t make much sense bet on this one. It’s a slightly lesser version of the first bet. (On this one, if Jacobs catches a pass, you’ll probably lose.) But it’s also more likely to get a result than first bet. There’s probably about a 65 percent chance Jacobs doesn’t catch a pass; that’s a winner. And if he does catch 1 pass, there’s about a 50 percent chance it won’t be for more than 5 yards. Of the 17 passes Jacobs has caught this year, only 7 have been for more than 5 yards.
Jake Ballard, under 27.5 receiving yards.
He’s been under 20 receiving yards four games in a row. Had the knee injury and might not be 100 percent. I think the 27.5 number was picked by somebody looking more at his season-long numbers. In the Green Bay game, Ballard caught 1 of the 8 passes thrown his way. Manning attempted 58 passes at San Francisco, and only 1 of them (an incompletion) was sent in Ballard’s direction.
Eli Manning, under 2.5 TD passes.
I would set the over-under number on Manning at about 1.9. He’s far more like to finish with 2 TDs than to make it up to 3. At 2.5 TD passes, the oddsmaker is essentially saying that if Manning played the Patriots every week for a full 16-game season, he’d throw 40 TDs. Manning threw 29 TDs in the 16-game regular season, and the Patriots allowed 26. The over-under number shouldn’t be 2.5; it should be 2.0.
Tom Brady, under 2.5 TD passes.
Same reasoning as Manning. If you look at the offenses and defenses for the Patriots and Giants, trends suggest both offenses should score at about a 2-1 clip (passing versus rushing touchdowns). So as with Manning, over-under for Brady should be about 1.9 TD passes. If you were to bet on both Manning and Brady, there would be very little chance that they would both get up to 3-plus. There’s a pretty good chance one of them would reach 3, but that would be a near-wash for you overall. And if they’re both under 2.5, you win big. In both of the last two meetings between these quarterbacks, neither quarterback has thrown more than 2 TDs.
David Tyree's 2008 Super Bowl catch will be shown be shown on TV during the game under 1.5 time.
Historic catch, but I can’t imagine a scenario where the broacast group would come up with a reason they needed to show it twice. Not an on-field issue, so it’s drifting out of my area of expertise, but I’m throwing it in there anyway.
Patriots will run for more than 102.5 yards.
I looked at this earlier in the week and calculated that New England should finish with about 116 rushing yards. The Giants were slightly below-average against the run for much of the year and have allowed 147 and 150 rushing yards in their last two games.
New England (+1.5 yards) will run for more yards than the Giants.
When I looked into this earlier in the week, I concluded the Patriots should run for about 10. New York allowed 147 and 150 rushing yards the last two weeks.
Tom Brady, under 320 passing yards.
I looked into this in more detail earlier in the week, and I think that’s about 25 yards too high.
Eli Manning (+4.5 yards) will throw for more yards than Tom Brady.
I believe Manning will throw for more yards straight up, and they’re giving Manning a 4.5-yard headstart. Numbers suggest Manning should beat Brady by about 10 yards.
Teams will run for more than 205 yards.
When I crunch the numbers, I get a number that about 15-20 yards higher. Both New England and New York, I believe, will for the bulk of this game be far more concerned with the pass. Think about how the Patriots beat the Rams; they hung back and let Marshall Faulk run the ball. When he was a defensive coordinator for the Giants, Bill Belichick used a similar sort of game plan in the historic upset against Buffalo’s K Gun – they let Thurman Thomas run for his yards. In this sort of game, I believe Belichick will be far more concerned with those three wide receivers than with stopping the run. And it works the same way on the other side of the ball. Some of New England’s best stretches of play against Baltimore came when they ran the ball. The Giants have given up over 145 rushing yards in back-to-back games. Their preference, I believe, is to be willing to give up some rushing production. They want to rush the passer. That’s what those defensive linemen do; they’re not run-stuffer guys.
Wes Welker, over 6.5 receptions.
He’s caught plenty of passes in his other games against the Giants (11, 11 and 9 in the three meetings in 2007 and 2011). Rob Gronkowski is hurting, which should mean more action for Welker.
Eli Manning, over .5 interceptions.
Patriots have intercepted 24 passes. Manning has thrown 19. That’s a combined 43 in 37 games. Over-under shouldn’t be .5, it should be 1.0
NEXT TIER DOWN
Other bets I like, but not quite as much:
BenJarvus Green-Ellis, over 47.5 rushing yards.
The Giants don’t defend the run that well. They’ve allowed 147 and 150 rushing yards in their last two games. They were below-average against the run during the regular season. Green-Ellis is the main back. On my board, I’ve got him at 52 rushing yards, and I think that’s a conservative projection (that includes the possibility that Stevan Ridley – who didn’t even play against Baltimore – could see a decent amount of action).
BenJarvus Green-Ellis will run for 16.5 more yards than Brandon Jacobs.
Jacobs hasn’t played much the last two weeks. Green-Ellis ran pretty well against the Ravens.
Henry Hynoski, 4.5 receiving yards.
They use him on dumpoff passes. He’s caught 11 passes in his last seven games. In four of his last seven games, Hynoski would win this bet.
Ahmad Bradshaw will score a touchdown.
The oddsmakers have him graded as not scoring (if he scores, your $100 wins $110; if you want to bet he doesn’t score, it will cost you $140 to win $100). When I researched the game, he came out to being worth about .63 of a touchdown. Unlike the bulk of the other bets, this isn’t a 50-50 type bet where you pick one option.
BenJarvus Green-Ellis will score a touchdown.
Same sort of bet as Bradshaw. My research indicates he’s worth .55 of a touchdown (about a 55 percent chance he’ll score). Line is set up to strongly suggest he won’t (you get $120 for your $100 if he scores; you must put up $150 to win $100 if you think he won’t).
Giants plus 3 points
And finally, I’m not sure if it counts as a “prop” bet, but I will take New York and the points. It opened at 3.5, but it won’t get back up there. I think the game should be more of a pick ‘em. All three of the Super Bowls the Patriots have won have been by 3 points. The Giants have beaten New England in the last two. With the 3-point cushion, I think they’re the smart choice.
Eli Manning, under 315 passing yards.
I looked into this earlier in the week, and 315 seems about 10-15 yards too high.
Ahmad Bradshaw, over 62.5 rushing yards.
My research/projections suggest the over-under on him should be about 4 yards higher.
Ahmad Bradshaw, over 13.5 rushing attempts.
They’ve used him a lot more than Brandon Jacobs in the last two games. Bradshaw is faster and shiftier, seeming to make him a better fit against this defense (the Patriots have Vince Wilfork inside, and he’s tough to move).
Posted by ERIC DEGERMAN | Feb. 07 at 12:41 AM
Dang, if my look at the box score is correct, you were 14-7 on your prop bets. Mighty impressive. And didn't keep track of how many times they showed the Tyree catch, but he got plenty of face time.
Posted by IAN ALLAN | Feb. 11 at 02:02 PM
Eric D: They showed Tyree on the sidelines, but for they actual catch, they showed it only once (and I'm not sure it was even during the game). I heard from a friend down in Vegas, however, who said a lot of these prop bets had a lot of "juice" attached to them. In rough terms, I think, you had to bet $120 on a lot of them to win $100. That tilts the odds in favor of the house. So if you were to bet to win $100 on 13 different bets for example, you would lose money if went 7-6 (you would win $700, but you would lose $720 on your six losers). So not really worth doing at that rate -- you would hardly be making anything at 8-5.
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.